|
|
 #2 (permalink) Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:59 am it's unreasonable for you to... vs. it's unreasonable of you to... |
|
|
You and your friend are both right. With the word "unreasonable" you can use both "of" and "for" without any real difference in meaning.
But you can't use "for" with "kind" or "sweet". |
|
Jamie (K)
I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 24 Feb 2006
Posts: 5332
Location: Detroit, Michigan, USA
|
|
| #3 (permalink) Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:05 am it's unreasonable for you to... vs. it's unreasonable of you to... |
|
|
| Jamie (K) wrote: |
With the word "unreasonable" you can use both "of" and "for" without any real difference in meaning.
But you can't use "for" with "kind" or "sweet". |
First of all, Thank you for your answer, Jamie!!
Um... May I ask you why? Hmm. Does 'unreasonable' have any features which 'kind' 'sweet' dont' have? Are there other adjectives like 'unreasonable', which indicate a kind of character, but can be used with both 'for' and 'of'?
sweetpumpkin |
|
Sweetpumpkin
I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 17 Dec 2007
Posts: 312
Location: S.Korea
|
 |
| #4 (permalink) Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:09 am it's unreasonable for you to... vs. it's unreasonable of you to... |
|
|
| Jamie (K) wrote: |
| But you can't use "for" with "kind" or "sweet". |
But what about:
For you to do this for me, is very kind/sweet. |
|
Molly
I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 12 Feb 2008
Posts: 4017
|
|
|
 Inga
I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 21 Apr 2008
Posts: 255
Location: Minsk, Belarus
|
|
| #6 (permalink) Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:25 am it's unreasonable for you to... vs. it's unreasonable of you to... |
|
|
It reminds me of “BE KIND FOR EVERYONE YOU MEET IS FIGHTING A HARD BATTLE”.
Of course we need a comma between 'kind' and 'for'. I'm sorry, it's irrelevant to the subject.  |
|
Haihao
I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 1392
Location: Japan
|
|
| #7 (permalink) Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:30 am it's unreasonable for you to... vs. it's unreasonable of you to... |
|
|
[quote="Inga"]
| Quote: |
| For you to do this for me, is very kind/sweet. |
Maybe because it's a different type of sentence?
I think, For you to do this for me is the Subject, but we don't have 'it's' in the sentence. However I always have problems with such type of sentence.
Yes, I see what you mean. The "for" in "For you to do this for me," is like "That you do this for me...", "Your doing this for me", and other such expressions.
So, we can also say "It’s unreasonable that you make me wait for a hour!" and ""It’s unreasonable making me wait for a hour!", and we can we also say "It's very sweet/kind that you help me...", so why is ""It's very sweet/kind for you to help me..." not acceptable? |
|
Molly
I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 12 Feb 2008
Posts: 4017
|
|
| #8 (permalink) Fri Jun 20, 2008 9:12 am it's unreasonable for you to... vs. it's unreasonable of you to... |
|
|
In my opinion, this is the meaning of the word 'unreasonable' in this particular sentence: It’s unreasonable for you to make me wait for an hour!
Though 'unreasonable' can characterize a person, it's seldom used to do it 'in general', mostly in particular situations. In this sentence it's not 'you', who was unreasonable, but your single action.
And 'It's very sweet/kind for you to help me...' sounds unnatural to me because it supposes that something good was done for 'you', not 'you' did this 'good'. Or it is not common for 'you' to do such kind things. Usually you are not so generous.
Sometimes it seems to me that the person who started the thread doesn't need such long explanation and is not interested in it.
_________________
I am an incurable optimist. |
|
Inga
I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 21 Apr 2008
Posts: 255
Location: Minsk, Belarus
|
|
| #9 (permalink) Fri Jun 20, 2008 9:20 am it's unreasonable for you to... vs. it's unreasonable of you to... |
|
|
| Quote: |
In my opinion, this is the meaning of the word 'unreasonable' in this particular sentence: It’s unreasonable for you to make me wait for an hour!
Though 'unreasonable' can characterize a person, it's seldom used to do it 'in general', mostly in particular situations. In this sentence it's not 'you', who was unreasonable, but your single action. |
I agree.
| Quote: |
| Sometimes it seems to me that the person who started the thread doesn't need such long explanation and is not interested in it. |
That's true, but we love extended threads, don't we?  And some students - I myself, for one - are not always happy with this kind of short answer:
| Quote: |
| But you can't use "for" with "kind" or "sweet". |
|
|
Molly
I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 12 Feb 2008
Posts: 4017
|
|
| #10 (permalink) Fri Jun 20, 2008 9:29 am it's unreasonable for you to... vs. it's unreasonable of you to... |
|
|
_________________
I am an incurable optimist. |
|
Inga
I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 21 Apr 2008
Posts: 255
Location: Minsk, Belarus
|
|
| #11 (permalink) Fri Jun 20, 2008 11:22 am it's unreasonable for you to... vs. it's unreasonable of you to... |
|
|
| Molly wrote: |
| Jamie (K) wrote: |
| But you can't use "for" with "kind" or "sweet". |
But what about:
For you to do this for me, is very kind/sweet. |
This apparently works only with a fronted prepositional phrase. |
|
Jamie (K)
I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 24 Feb 2006
Posts: 5332
Location: Detroit, Michigan, USA
|
|
| #12 (permalink) Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:22 pm it's unreasonable for you to... vs. it's unreasonable of you to... |
|
|
| Jamie (K) wrote: |
| For you to do this for me, is very kind/sweet. |
This apparently works only with a fronted prepositional phrase.[/quote]
Hm, why do you think that is? |
|
Molly
I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 12 Feb 2008
Posts: 4017
|
|
|
Sweetpumpkin
I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 17 Dec 2007
Posts: 312
Location: S.Korea
|
|
|
Sweetpumpkin
I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 17 Dec 2007
Posts: 312
Location: S.Korea
|
|
|
| knock wood v.s. knock on wood | Sentence "They elected her to be the president"? |
